reported: "Scholars Publish New Papyrus With Early Sayings of Jesus"

[Secret Alias]

We all kind of know in the back of our minds when we see a hybrid Matthew/Luke mixed with Thomas that we are dealing with the Gospel of the Hebrews right? The gospel that Clement of Rome is citing in his second letter. Can't prove it of course but the date, the nexus of texts, it's the "Hebrew gospel" right?

[davidmartin]

The Luke connection points to Marcion but the Matthew connection points to Hebrews?
MLinssen argues for Marcion seems like a strong argument for this... just sayin'

I got another idea but it seems Marcion has the edge between these two

Textual witness to Luke 12:16 - 12:31 following the order of Luke and Matthew 6 with the preceding parable of the rich fool identified with the "he died" - from Thomas 63. Not just Thomas 26 (and 36?) involved

MLinssen has a paper on it out already
https://www.academia.edu/106297440/P_Ox ... t_I_of_II_

It's a gospel, for sure

[Secret Alias]

"An Entirely Fresh Gospel"

https://www.academia.edu/106297440/P_Ox ... t_I_of_II_

[StephenGoranson]

If I may venture the possibility, pOxy 5575 *may* be another hint that gThomas was first written, not in Coptic, but in Greek.

[Secret Alias]

Proved in my mind. Or at least needs to be disproved now.

[StephenGoranson]

It seems a safe bet that Marcion did not write in Coptic.

[davidmartin]

If I may venture the possibility, pOxy 5575 *may* be another hint that gThomas was first written, not in Coptic, but in Greek.

or that Thomas was a source to the synoptics

[davidmartin]

It seems a safe bet that Marcion did not write in Coptic.

and that he didn't write Thomas

[MrMacSon]

Peter Gurry, NT Prof @ Phoenix Seminary, Sept 2:
"The editors of #POxy5575 compare it to the hand of P.Oxy. 4009 and I must say they look very similar to me. Interestingly, some think P.Oxy. 4009 is from the Gospel of Peter but that is much debated."


Mark Goodacre, Sept 4:
1/5 "It looks to me like the author of the work to which #POxy5575 witnesses knows...Luke’s distinctive order of sayings in Lk 12. I am guessing author knows Matt and Thom too, but structured around Luke."

eta:
2/5: "But this depends on Henry's brilliant conjecture that the partial first word is "he died", & that that comes from Thomas 63 (Rich Fool), which is parallel to Luke 12.16-21, immediately before Luke 12.22-31, to which the fragment goes next."

3/5:" Only Luke juxtaposes Rich Fool (Lk 12.16-21) with the "Consider the lilies" stuff (Lk 12.22-31). Mt doesn't have the Rich Fool, and Thomas has it in a different context (Thom. 63)."

4/5: "And Henry's conjecture really is genius. I can't think what else that partial word could be."

5/5: "I can feel a Synopsis coming on! And a nice table."

Mark Goodacre, Sept 7:
"Still looking at #POxy5575 and finding its repeated use of "Father" interesting, x 4, with no cases of "God". The first "Father" parallels "Father" in Thomas 27, but in the parallels to the next three, Matthew has Father / God / Father, and Luke has God / God / Father."


And there's this good, < 3 minute video:

[Secret Alias]

Who's the cricket player shown in the "New Discovery: Sayings of Jesus" video? Hasn't this gone far enough? I get the political correctness of not showing Jesus as a "Jew"? But really? This is supposed to rectify the situation?